Issue: While
a member of the board of directors of a condominium
association, a Judicial Official recommended an
attorney to represent the association. The Judicial
Official ceased to be a member of the condominium
association at least fifteen years ago and no longer
lives in or owns the condominium that was the basis
for his membership in the condominium association.
The attorney has continuously represented the
condominium association. Does the Judicial Official
have a present duty of recusal and/or disclosure
when the attorney appears before the Judicial
Official?

Response:
Based upon the information provided, including that
the Judicial Official originally recommended the
attorney to the condominium association board, that
the attorney has continuously represented the
association with respect to its legal matters (
including foreclosures for unpaid common charges),
that the Judicial Official has no personal or social
relationship with the attorney, that the attorney
has never personally represented the Judicial
Official, and that the Judicial Official has in
prior cases disclosed the above information (which
has resulted in only two requests for recusal, both
of which occurred in the past year), the four
Committee members present unanimously determined
that the Judicial Official does not have a duty in
future cases to recuse himself or herself or to
notify parties of the Judicial Official’s role as a
former condominium owner, former director of the
condominium association, or in recommending that the
attorney be hired by the condominium association
subject to the following conditions: (1) that the
Judicial Official does not believe that he or she
has any personal bias involving the attorney or the
condominium association if the attorney is
representing that entity, (2) that the
representation is not with respect to a matter
involving the condominium association that was
pending when the Judicial Official was a member of
its Board of Directors, and (3) that the
representation does not involve a policy or practice
of the condominium association that the Judicial
Official helped to formulate. In rendering its
decision, the Committee considered Canons 1, 2, and
3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, C.G.S. § 51-39,
as well as opinion in JE 2008-21 (holding that a
Judicial Official who had served as a part-time
corporation counsel did not have to recuse himself
or herself from civil or criminal cases in which the
former municipal employer is a party provided
specified conditions are met and further noting that
the Judicial Official needed to disclose for a
reasonable period of time, which was not less than
two years, the prior employment relationship).
Finally, the Committee noted that even under Rule
2.11 of the Code of Judicial Conduct that will take
effect on January 1, 2011, recusal and disclosure
are not required on the facts of this inquiry
provided that the conditions set forth above are
complied with.